general ignorance/stupidity

[adventure_of_link]

nvidia > ati

[gllt]

nvidia > ati

I feel like an idiot responding to every post (probably because I am)

But I agree with this entirely except in the case of HD 40Somethinges paired up with a quad core.


I sound like... franky???

[ZH/Franky]

Dude, trust me, you'd be much better off just buying a PS3. Consoles are way better performers than PC's in regards to gaming.

While a PS3 would be cheaper than building a new PC, a used PS3 is cheaper still. Just think about it; the PS3 has only been around a few years. If you get a used PS3 (one of the older ones that have full-hardware PS2 backwards compatibility), it'll likely be about 2 years old. If you get a used 40GB model (the one with no PS2 backwards compatibility), it'll likely be only around a year old (since the previous owner bought it, that is). So basically, it'll be almost brand-new. A few weeks ago, I bought a used PS3 (40GB model) for £220, and it works as if it were new. A brand new one would have cost me £299.99.

Yeah sure, you'll have to buy games (instead of torrenting them if you were a PC gamer), but then more often than not, you can find used copies of games that are either completely or almost mint condition (and if when the clerk hands you the disk, it really is quite sratched up, then ask if there is another, less/non sratched up copy). I got a used copy of Metal Gear Solid 4 for £20, and the disc is in mint condition. I got a used copy of Grand Theft Auto 4 for £20, and again, the disc is in mint condition. If I got both these games as brand new, it would have cost me £89 (in the shop I went to, games were £44.50 each), but instead it only cost me £40. And anyway, just how many games you are going to play and complete within a year?
...and if you're really worried about having to pay for all your games, I'm pretty sure there'll be decent modchips for the PS3 in a few years. Though downloading blu-ray disc images may take a few months, and burning the image to a blu-ray disc may take a day
(still, you could easily rent games and copy those. The money you pay for renting a PS3 game for 1 day will be much less than the electricity bill for leaving your computer on for beyond weeks to download a PS3 game, in any case).

EDIT: Heh, sorry for the rant. You don't have to listen to me anyway; I'm just giving advice, that's all. Still, I'm assuming that you are an American? Prices for things will probably be much different over there, so maybe my advice doesn't help at all (I'm British).

[funkyass]

nvidia > ati

franky block of stupid.

You two need to learn when to keep quiet, before someone teaches you. Those two posts are easily the dumbest in the thread so far.

[ZH/Franky]

You two need to learn when to keep quiet, before someone teaches you. Those two posts are easily the dumbest in the thread so far.

Ok then. Care to elaborate on exactly how and why my previous comment is stupid?

[adventure_of_link]

nvidia > ati

franky block of stupid.

You two need to learn when to keep quiet, before someone teaches you. Those two posts are easily the dumbest in the thread so far.

...I knew someone was going to respond like this.

In any case, I've heard that ATi wasn't doing so hot in general anyhow.

[funkyass]

...I knew someone was going to respond like this.

In any case, I've heard that ATi wasn't doing so hot in general anyhow.

Yes, audience - its true. AOL lives under a rock.

The financial well being of a company has no bearing on this thread. Beyond that, a quick look at a random hardware review site will give you up to date information about video cards.

On a more basic level: if you knew you where going to say something stupid, and knew that someone would call you on it, why did you do it in the first place?

[adventure_of_link]

The financial well being of a company has no bearing on this thread. Beyond that, a quick look at a random hardware review site will give you up to date information about video cards.

wasn't talking about financial well being, sorry. I was talking more along the lines of performance and drivers in general. Way to assume that I was talking about their financial situation.

I also had no idea either company was doing poor financial wise.

On a more basic level: if you knew you where going to say something stupid, and knew that someone would call you on it, why did you do it in the first place?

it was bound to happen sooner or later..

[funkyass]

I was talking more along the lines of performance and drivers in general. Way to assume that I was talking about their financial situation.

There are two possible areas of concern with your original statement, I addressed them both.

No assumptions made.

[gllt]

DO NOT BAD TALK THE FAQ MAKER

[adventure_of_link]

DO NOT BAD TALK THE FAQ MAKER

WELCOME TO THE ZSNES BOARD

[Rashidi]

i always love seeing ATi .vs. NVidia "discussion"

[sweener2001]

nvidia > ati

franky block of stupid.

You two need to learn when to keep quiet, before someone teaches you. Those two posts are easily the dumbest in the thread so far.

...I knew someone was going to respond like this.

In any case, I've heard that ATi wasn't doing so hot in general anyhow.

aol == supermassive stupid fail

the 4870 X2 is the single most powerful card on the market. the gtx 280 doesn't have dx 10.1 support, and is no different than an OC'd 9800.

the 4850 can play mass effect at 1920x1200 with everything turned on. the 4850 in crossfire is a BEAST. in their respective price ranges the 4850, 4850 crossfired, and 4870 X2 are tomshardware.com "best bang for the buck" choices.

SHUT UP.

the fact alone that nvidia was forced to cut their prices on the 260 and 280 cards BECAUSE of ati's offerings should have already been a big hint. but you're retarded. i should have expected this kind of stupid.

i didn't even read franky's post. pc's are ALWAYS the better machine for gaming.

EDIT: i forced myself to read franky's post, and here a couple reasons why it's stupid. used != new. you have NO CLUE how long it actually takes to d/l a blu-ray or burn it.

when a person doesn't want to pay for games, paying for games is retarded, no matter how cheap.

fallout 3 on ps3 is the worst version, bioshock JUST came out, no crysis, no mass effect, no first gears, no civ4, no world in conflict, no starcraft ii, no diablo 3, etc.

and while a ps3 was mentioned, HE WANTS A COMPUTER

[ZH/Franky]

pc's are ALWAYS the better machine for gaming

Oh really? Then explain why games that quite happily run on the 360 or PS3 require much more processing power to run at the same fullspeed on a PC. And talk about the slow OS that pushes system requirements for games even higher.

EDIT: i forced myself to read franky's post, and here a couple reasons why it's stupid. used != new. you have NO CLUE how long it actually takes to d/l a blu-ray or burn it.

Uses != new... technically, that it correct, however:
A used peice of equipment in the same (or almost the same) condition as a new peice of equipment practically IS new. And yeah, I suppose dl'ing a blu-ray image wouldn't take that long; 25GB single-layer discs for sure, which would probably take only about 5 times as long as burning a full DVD image, but even still, a PS3 game would typically take up less than 25GB, so maybe it'll take around 30 minutes to burn. Maybe to download it'll take a day if you're on a fast internet connection, or a week to download if you're on a slower connection.
Yeah, my statement about time it takes to dl and burn was unreasonable. My fucking bad.

when a person doesn't want to pay for games, paying for games is retarded, no matter how cheap.

Ok, that's perfectly reasonable. However, remember the statement about modchips.

fallout 3 on ps3 is the worst version, bioshock JUST came out, no crysis, no mass effect, no first gears, no civ4, no world in conflict, no starcraft ii, no diablo 3, etc.

Yeah, but then there is Metal Gear Solid 4, and while some PS3 versions of games that are available on the 360 are not as good, other PS3 ports are perfectly OK. As for crysis, mass effect, gears of war, starcraft 2, diablo 3, world in conflict, etc. Did you know that I can't stand first person shooters (and real time strategy games for that matter)? Ok, bioshock is an exception. So yeah, and that's been released. When I save up the money for it, I'll definitely be getting a copy.

and while a ps3 was mentioned, HE WANTS A COMPUTER

Ok, that's perfectly reasonable.


I can run Linux on my PS3 (though I haven't actually got round to installing linux on it yet), btw; sure, zsnes is out the window, but I also don't care; bsnes and snes9x will do the job just fine. I'm pretty sure that's impossible on the 360. And regardless of what any of you say, the PS3 is more powerful. Less powerful graphics card, sure, but the CBE makes up for that; and the PS3's GPU has it's own dedicated RAM, rather than sharing RAM with the CPU (which is what the 360 does). Oh yeah, and the 360 only uses Dual-Layer DVD's. You have to cough up the dough for an addon to be able to watch movies in a format that is obsolete. Guess what the PS3 has built-in?

Shall I continue?

[gllt]

Someone rerail this thread stat

also

games run on the PS3 and 360 with low clock processors and cheap hardware because the games are intricately designed around all that embedded crap so that its super optimized

we can't emulate ps2 just because it's made of crap, that crap has games that are super-optimized for it so we have to emulate those crappy components exactly if we want the same thing, and emulating embedded crap takes a lot of processing power cause it's a bunch of small devices we're emulating in sync

games formatted for the PC that are also found on the PS3 or 360 can't be as tightly tweaked to the hardware since the hardware is so variable from machine to machine.

also I play all my games on a big fat warped picture old apex TV and I do my computer stuff on a 5:4 17 inch monitor covered in paint and with dead pixels so I don't get to taste nice things like HD and Blu Ray and 1080p so imo I THINK IT'S ALL POINTLESS all you silly visiophiless

speed I get thats it

I just ate half a box of cheezits so don't mind if none of that makes sense

[ZH/Franky]

Someone rerail this thread stat

also

games run on the PS3 and 360 with low clock processors and cheap hardware because the games are intricately designed around all that embedded crap so that its super optimized

we can't emulate ps2 just because it's made of crap, that crap has games that are super-optimized for it so we have to emulate those crappy components exactly if we want the same thing, and emulating embedded crap takes a lot of processing power cause it's a bunch of small devices we're emulating in sync

games formatted for the PC that are also found on the PS3 or 360 can't be as tightly tweaked to the hardware since the hardware is so variable from machine to machine.

also I play all my games on a big fat warped picture old apex TV and I do my computer stuff on a 5:4 17 inch monitor covered in paint and with dead pixels so I don't get to taste nice things like HD and Blu Ray and 1080p so imo I THINK IT'S ALL POINTLESS all you silly visiophiless

speed I get thats it

I just ate half a box of cheezits so don't mind if none of that makes sense

This is exactly what I meant. All PS3's are the same, so developers can do crazy low-level optimizations and it'll work for everyone, whereas on a PC they can't because people have different hardware that might not work for these optimizations. Games also have direct access to the hardware in a console, whereas games on a PC have to go through various API's and whatnot, that and an entire operating system is running on top of it. Simply put, PC's are not fit for gaming.

[gllt]

This is exactly what I meant. All PS3's are the same, so developers can do crazy low-level optimizations and it'll work for everyone, whereas on a PC they can't because people have different hardware that might not work for these optimizations. Games also have direct access to the hardware in a console, whereas games on a PC have to go through various API's and whatnot, that and an entire operating system is running on top of it. Simply put, PC's are not fit for gaming.

But they are fun for gaming.

[adventure_of_link]

pc's are ALWAYS the better machine for gaming

Oh really? Then explain why games that quite happily run on the 360 or PS3 require much more processing power to run at the same fullspeed on a PC. And talk about the slow OS that pushes system requirements for games even higher.

I pray to God this statement is correct...

The reason why PCs are better for gaming is that:

1) PC hardware changes constantly, so running, say, Doom 3 on hardware that was out when it was out may have sucked or choked the PC, but hardware has improved since then. In short, because PCs change constantly, graphics may get better/more optimized due to faster hardware and/or improvements. Games may run better too, due to faster CPUs since then. With a 360 or PS3, you're ALWAYS stuck with that same hardware.
2) because PCs have this thing called HARD DRIVES, which are read/write media, if the developers, say, want to release an expansion or release patches to optimize the code and/or fix bugs, it can be done easier. on a 360 or PS3, you'll have to release a whole new disk.

[odditude]

I pray to God this statement is correct...

sorry, man, but FAIL.

2) because PCs have this thing called HARD DRIVES, which are read/write media, if the developers, say, want to release an expansion or release patches to optimize the code and/or fix bugs, it can be done easier. on a 360 or PS3, you'll have to release a whole new disk.

i'm now at version 1.04 of Burnout Paradise on my PS3, with significant new and enhanced content. It's installed quite happily on the 60GB hard drive of my PS3, which happens to be intentionally user-accessible and easily upgradeable.

[neo_bahamut1985]

pc's are ALWAYS the better machine for gaming

Oh really? Then explain why games that quite happily run on the 360 or PS3 require much more processing power to run at the same fullspeed on a PC. And talk about the slow OS that pushes system requirements for games even higher.

I pray to God this statement is correct...

The reason why PCs are better for gaming is that:

1) PC hardware changes constantly, so running, say, Doom 3 on hardware that was out when it was out may have sucked or choked the PC, but hardware has improved since then. In short, because PCs change constantly, graphics may get better/more optimized due to faster hardware and/or improvements. Games may run better too, due to faster CPUs since then. With a 360 or PS3, you're ALWAYS stuck with that same hardware.
2) because PCs have this thing called HARD DRIVES, which are read/write media, if the developers, say, want to release an expansion or release patches to optimize the code and/or fix bugs, it can be done easier. on a 360 or PS3, you'll have to release a whole new disk.

I definitely agree with you on that one; consoles are optimized to run games at their intended/programmed speed. Computers will have to have the necessary hardware to compensate in order to run the same games at a good speed. Perhaps a similar principle can be applied as to why it's so hard to program emulators well enough to achieve full speed. Anyone knows that there are several factors that have to be taken into consideration. Let's take the PS2 emulator PCSX2 for example; the PS2 processors use one complex programming language while Windows/Linux use the x86 programming language, and programming from language to another ain't gonna be pretty at first, like when PCSX2 first came out. Second, computers were never meant to run PS2 games, so, the programmers have to find ways to trick the OS into thinking it's a PS2. PCSX2 has just barely gotten to the point of having many of it's games at near, if not, playable speed. It can take several years to get emulators optimized well enough to play games. This is merely my biased opinion and if it so be I'm wrong, well, I'm wrong.

[AamirM]

Hi,

Oh really? Then explain why games that quite happily run on the 360 or PS3 require much more processing power to run at the same fullspeed on a PC. And talk about the slow OS that pushes system requirements for games even higher.

Simply because every piece of hardware in a console is much more tuned for gaming/graphics. Some of the calculations are performed in hardware in consoles whereas they are performed in software on PCs.

I think the future consoles would in fact be PCs. Arcades already are (Taito X series).

stay safe,

AamirM

[ZH/Franky]

2) because PCs have this thing called HARD DRIVES, which are read/write media, if the developers, say, want to release an expansion or release patches to optimize the code and/or fix bugs, it can be done easier. on a 360 or PS3, you'll have to release a whole new disk.

Umm, yeah, they do. And so do PS3's have hard discs. Mine can fit 40GB of data on it, and I plan on upgrading it in the future (to something like at least 160GB). Any 2.5 inch SATA disc can be installed into a PS3, and when you turn it back on, the PS3 will automatically format it for you. Hell, Sony even makes it easy for you; there's a hatch on the side --> just slide the drive out, put the new one in, and voila. Then after that, you could probably sell your old drive or cannibalize it and turn it into a portable hard disc, or whatever. Hell, I'm pretty sure you could use the default PS3 hard disc in a regular PC.

Just like with PC Games on PC's, PS3 games install a lot of the disc's content onto the PS3's hard disc.
So yeah, like, I've already recieved updates for GTA4. Haven't played MGS4 as much as GTA4 in the few weeks I've had my PS3, but I'm pretty sure there are updates for that (most probably for netplay, with some updates also for the main game I suppose); haven't tried getting online on MGS4 yet, though.
( Really pisses me off with GTA4 though. When the game tells me I need an update, it stops me from playing online until I install the update. And on the internet connection I'm on, updates take ages. 512k internet is fine for playing online, but updates are a bitch. And so what do I do? I leave my PS3 on for a while updating, only to find that when I return, it failed during the update process because the damn router disconnected me from the internet for like 2 fucking seconds. Either that or the damn cat5e cable falls out (the clips on both ends are broken (they're not even there)). And so, I start again, in a loop until the damn thing manages to fully download, after which it's all plain sailing. Ah, the joys; the nostalga will hit me when I'm like, 30 )

I think the future consoles would in fact be PCs. Arcades already are (Taito X series).

Yeah, I think that's pretty much the direction things are going in. I mean, the PS3 itself can be used as a desktop computer (you can run linux on it). I'm not even going to bother with linux on the PS3 just yet, since I'm on an SD TV. Sure it would work, but my main reason for wanting linux on my PS3 is so that I can use bsnes to play Shin Megami Tensei, and European PS3's can only output 50hz pal when hooked up to a SD TV. Shin Megami Tensei is 60HZ NTSC (or "60 fps" on bsnes). I'm trying to save up for a 19" hd set (euro ps3's may only be able to output 50hz pal, but all PS3's from any country adhere to the ATSC standard, and all HD TV's from any country are also the same (I can get 60hz 720p ATSC out of my PS3 if I hook it up to a HD set, in other words). I don't need an expensive 1080p set (I'm also poor, so even if I wanted one, I couldn't afford it) since most PS3 games display natively in 720p, and the ones that display natively in anything above can still be downscaled (since most 720p TV's can still accept 1080p, but just downscale it to 720p)). That said, my mother's friend has a 32" HD display that she got for a considerably low price in Manchester at some shop somewhere (I'll have to ask this woman is she remembers the location of that shop). Apparently this shop buys older stock from Argos and sells it for discount prices. It just so happens that my grandmother lives in Bolton; me and my family are visiting my grandma at christmas, so if I can save up enough by then, I could probably ask my dad to drive me to said shop, so I can stop by and see what the store has available. If I do manage to save up some money by then, I'm pretty sure a 19" display would be within my price range.

[odditude]

can someone extract the idiocy and dump it in another thread? there's actually legitimate discussion between sweener2001, funkyass, and myself buried in here somewhere.

[Tallgeese]

...I gotta ask, is it really worth keeping Franky around?

[gllt]

...I gotta ask, is it really worth keeping Franky around?

Ask the same people who think its a good idea to keep me around.